Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Ron Paul Has Won
PatrickRuffini.com ^ | November 26th, 2007 | Patrick Ruffini

Posted on 11/26/2007 1:54:54 PM PST by rob777

He won’t win the nomination. He won’t win any primaries. But for Ron Paul’s quixotic bid for the White House, it’s “Mission Accomplished.”

In the past few months, Ron Paul has dramatically raised the profile of libertarianism inside the Republican Party. My small-l libertarian friends seem more comfortable describing themselves as such, even though they’ll go out of their way to disassociate themselves from Ron Paul and the big-L kind.

Libertarianism in the GOP took a big hit on 9/11, and it’s slowly coming back, with Ron Paul as the catalyst. Its underlying ideals still have appeal well beyond the cramped confines of the LP. If it’s possible to be known as a pro-life, pro-war, pro-wiretapping libertarian, then sign me up. Markos too brands himself a “libertarian Democrat,” though he’s never read Hayek and supports big government social programs.

Some campaigns can win big without ever coming close to winning an actual contest. Pat Robertson’s 1988 campaign signaled that Christian Conservatives had arrived in the GOP. Ron Paul is doing the same for libertarians. This is not a counterweight to the religious right per se, since Paul is identified as pro-life, but it does potentially open up a new army of activists on the right not primarily motivated by social/moral issues.

Not every losing single-issue candidate succeeds like this. Immigration-restrictionists still lack an outlet in the GOP, thanks to Tom Tancredo’s embarrassing tone-deafness as a candidate. Sam Brownback’s campaign had hoped to galvanize single-issue pro-lifers, but was hobbled by his dry persona. Duncan Hunter looks mostly like a campaign for Secretary of Defense.

Assuming Paul loses, where does small-l libertarianism go from here? His movement already did the smart thing by making peace with social conservatism. Libertarianism is no longer aligned with libertine stances on abortion and gay rights.

To become the ascendant ideology within the GOP, I suspect they’ll have to find a way to do the same thing on national security. The war on terror writ large is the one big thing social and economic conservatives agree on, and Ron Paul is vocally aligned against both.

Mainstream Republican libertarians might be gung-ho for Paul’s small-government idealism, they might adopt Glenn Reynoldsish skepticism of the homeland security bureaucracy, and even John McCain has lately made a thing of ripping the military-industrial complex, but there is no way — I repeat NO WAY — they will embrace Ron Paul if he continues to blame America for 9/11 and imply that America is acting illegally in defending itself around the globe. Even if they aren’t the biggest fans of the war, most people that are available for Ron Paul on the right are by temperament patriotic and will never vote for someone who sounds like Noam Chomsky.

As someone who routinely called myself a libertarian prior to 9/11, here’s how I would square the circle: Absolute freedom within our borders, for our own citizens; eternal vigilance and (when necessary) ruthlessness abroad. For libertarian ideals to survive, they must be relentlessly defended against the likes of Islamic extremists. Take a look at Andrew Sullivan’s writing right after 9/11 to see this ideal in its purest form; far from a religious crusade, ours was a war for secularism, tolerance, and free societies where gays don’t get stoned to death.

The key principle is one of reciprocity. If you behave peacefully and embrace the norms of a libertarian society, we leave you alone. If you seek to destroy a free society, we will destroy you.

If they’re serious about defending their ideals and seeing to it that libertarianism survives more than a generation in actual practice, I don’t see any reason why libertarians couldn’t embrace a more conservative positioning on national security.


TOPICS: Constitution/Conservatism; Politics/Elections
KEYWORDS: 2008; 2kooky; 4georgesoros; beltbomber; catspaw; libertarians; midget; nutcase; paulistinians; ronpaul; ruffini; soros; whackjob; winners
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-5051-100101-113 next last
I find the comparison to Pat Robertson's campaign interesting. That campaign was responsible for bringing a lot of politically active Christians into the GOP. Will Ron's campaign do the same for limited government conservatives? While I do not support his campaign this election cycle, the long term political impact of the movenevt he has inspired is of intense interest to me.
1 posted on 11/26/2007 1:54:55 PM PST by rob777
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: rob777
In the past few months, Ron Paul has dramatically raised the profile of libertarianism inside the Republican Party.

Yes, but it's not a positive image.


2 posted on 11/26/2007 1:56:27 PM PST by Petronski (Reject the liberal troika: romney, giuliani, mccain)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: rob777

I wish your analysis were correct and Ron Paul would draw attention to libertarian principles but his attention has been mainly fueled by his anti-war message. Far more Democrats than libertarians are coming to his support.


3 posted on 11/26/2007 1:58:31 PM PST by Cat loving Texan
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: rob777

I think he has raised the profile. I’m not sure he has raised it in a positive direction.


4 posted on 11/26/2007 1:58:35 PM PST by The Ghost of FReepers Past (Woe unto them that call evil good, and good evil; that put darkness for light..... Isaiah 5:20)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: rob777

5 posted on 11/26/2007 1:59:26 PM PST by reagan_fanatic (Ron Paul put the cuckoo in my Cocoa Puffs)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: reagan_fanatic

Masterpiece!


6 posted on 11/26/2007 2:01:26 PM PST by lormand (God Bless the USA!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: rob777
In the past few months, Ron Paul has dramatically raised the profile of libertarianism inside the Republican Party.

Yeah, but that profile isn't complimentary. His campaign has done more damage to libertarianism than anything else by connecting it with surrendering in the WOT and appeasement of Islamists rather than what that political movement should be known for -- limited gov't advocacy.

7 posted on 11/26/2007 2:01:37 PM PST by Mr. Mojo (“Be wary of strong drink. It can make you shoot at tax collectors and miss.")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: rob777
lib•er•tar•ian

n. 1. a person who believes in the doctrine of the freedom of the will

2. a person who believes in full individual freedom of thought, expression and action

3. a freewheeling rebel who hates wiretaps, loves Ron Paul and is redirecting politics

Libertarians are for the Freedom of all but the Ragheads in faraway places with hard to pronounce names

8 posted on 11/26/2007 2:01:43 PM PST by woofie
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: rob777
"If you seek to destroy a free society, we will destroy you. "

Destroy? The only Defense the Liberatarian uses is an all-out frontal assault with HOT AIR weaponry.

9 posted on 11/26/2007 2:01:58 PM PST by traditional1
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: rob777

It’s of interest to me as well. The problem as I see it is this. Those that agree with Paul’s decent views stand a very good chance of being blackballed as simply another fellow traveler of Paul.

Paul presidential campaign has done nothing for true conservatives as far as I am concerned. No, instead he has given the press grounds to dismiss those that support smaller government, less taxation and on and on...


10 posted on 11/26/2007 2:02:43 PM PST by DoughtyOne (California, where the death penalty is reserved for wholesome values. SB 777)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Petronski

His negatives are in the mid-50s among likely voters in Iowa - the more Paul is known, the more he is disliked by his own base.


11 posted on 11/26/2007 2:03:33 PM PST by Baladas
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: rob777

I think the one thing that Ron Paul running will guarantee is a Democratic victory. Much like Ralph Nadar’s running guaranteed Bush’s election by drawing off votes from then vice-president Al whats his name.


12 posted on 11/26/2007 2:04:45 PM PST by DoingTheFrenchMistake
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: rob777

(gad) As long as I don’t have to see the “VOTE RON PAUL” threads any more. Da freak.


13 posted on 11/26/2007 2:06:08 PM PST by stimpy17 (Home of the free because of the Brave.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Lazarus Longer
"His campaign has done more damage to libertarianism than anything else by connecting it with surrendering in the WOT and appeasement of Islamists rather than what that political movement should be known for -- limited gov't advocacy."


That has been my concern ever since it was announced that he was thinking of running for President. At first, I ignored the campaign for that very reason. Lately, I have been curious as to the make up of the movement he is attracting, so I did some research. Contrary to the standard assumption on this site that most of his support comes from the antiwar left, I have found that he draws a lot of support from those who believe that the GOP has betrayed the cause of limited government. Financially, he seems to be getting some support from the investment community, particularly the hard money investors. I have been desperately looking for a sign that the limited government movement still has some life within the GOP. The story of the Ron Paul campaign is going to be in what becomes of the movement he inspired after the campaign is over.
14 posted on 11/26/2007 2:15:47 PM PST by rob777 (Personal Responsibility is the Price of Freedom)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: rob777
Jackie Mason Rebuts Ron Paul Supporters
15 posted on 11/26/2007 2:17:18 PM PST by sageb1 (This is the Final Crusade. There are only 2 sides. Pick one.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: DoingTheFrenchMistake

Didja read the article?

It starts out observing that Ron Paul will not be the Republican nominee - so don’t go into how bad it would be if he is.
The point of the article is that he’s getting rousing the libertarian subset of the Republican party - and that it’s a force to be reconed with.

Ron Paul won’t be the nominee. We know that. Nobody seriously contends he will.
HOWEVER, he’s making it clear that there’s a whole lotta Republicans that agree with him on a lot of issues, and while he won’t “win” by being the nominee (much less POTUS), he has already “won” by garnering lots of support and not being easily dismissed.

There’s a lot of us who, while perhaps put off by some of his comments, agree with him on a LOT of points which other contenders are missing.
Don’t underestimate the influence of the libertarian branch of the Republican party; a successful candidate won’t.


16 posted on 11/26/2007 2:17:47 PM PST by ctdonath2 (The color blue tastes like the square root of 0?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies]

To: rob777

But, why post this article here?


17 posted on 11/26/2007 2:20:02 PM PST by Sonora
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Extremely Extreme Extremist; traviskicks; Eric Blair 2084; George W. Bush; Iwo Jima

Ping


18 posted on 11/26/2007 2:23:52 PM PST by rob777 (Personal Responsibility is the Price of Freedom)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 14 | View Replies]

To: rob777
... imply that America is acting illegally in defending itself around the globe.

We were defending ourselves in Bosnia? We were defending ourselves in Somalia? Are we defending ourselves in Djibouti, Ghana? Or in the Philipines, Kyrgyzstan, Paraguay, Uganda, Denmark, Cyprus, Germany, Honduras, and Spain?

19 posted on 11/26/2007 2:27:14 PM PST by mvpel (Michael Pelletier)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: ctdonath2

Ron Paul is rousing the moonbat subset of the Republican party. True constitutionalist as well as true conservatives think his stances are bunk. Republicans fund him in the hopes he runs as a 3rd party candidate and in doing so pulls votes from the Democrats- not because his message “resonates.” He’s given libertarianism a black-eye.


20 posted on 11/26/2007 2:29:51 PM PST by Prime Rib Minister (Don't know who I will vote for, but I know it won't be Fred)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 16 | View Replies]

To: rob777

21 posted on 11/26/2007 2:30:56 PM PST by WakeUpAndVote (Ho, Ho, Ho! MERRY CHRISTMAS! God bless us one and all, if you (IF YOU LIKE IT OR NOT!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: rob777

22 posted on 11/26/2007 2:31:27 PM PST by WakeUpAndVote (Ho, Ho, Ho! MERRY CHRISTMAS! God bless us one and all, if you (IF YOU LIKE IT OR NOT!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: rob777

23 posted on 11/26/2007 2:31:54 PM PST by WakeUpAndVote (Ho, Ho, Ho! MERRY CHRISTMAS! God bless us one and all, if you (IF YOU LIKE IT OR NOT!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Baladas
His negatives are in the mid-50s among likely voters in Iowa

Source, please

the more Paul is known, the more he is disliked by his own base.

His base pretty much consists of everybody. I don't think Dr. Paul gives a crap about GOP insiders and hacks angry that he's spoiling their fun.

24 posted on 11/26/2007 2:33:47 PM PST by Extremely Extreme Extremist
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]

To: DoughtyOne
Paul presidential campaign has done nothing for true conservatives as far as I am concerned. No, instead he has given the press grounds to dismiss those that support smaller government, less taxation and on and on...

Do you seriously think that the press NEEDS any grounds to dismiss those that support smaller government, less taxation, and so on?

You've got to be kidding me.

25 posted on 11/26/2007 2:35:00 PM PST by mvpel (Michael Pelletier)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: WakeUpAndVote; George W. Bush

Man, I’m so glad I took FReeper’s George W. Bush’s advice and installed ad-blocker on my browers. It’s nice looking at red Xs instead of photo-shopped garbage.


26 posted on 11/26/2007 2:35:10 PM PST by Extremely Extreme Extremist
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 23 | View Replies]

To: DoughtyOne
Paul's presidential campaign has done nothing for true conservatives as far as I am concerned. No, instead he has given the press grounds to dismiss those that support smaller government, less taxation and on and on...

I agree. Ron's vehement anti-war message simply strengthens Democrats, who flock to 'support' him but who, in reality, are hoping to fracture the already-weakened Republican party. The Libertarian small-government message is practically invisible with Ron Paul ranting about Iraq. His suggestions that there is a possibility of 'the government' being involved in the death and destruction of the terrorist attacks of 9/11/01, simply mark Ron Paul and his libertarianism as part of a 'kook fringe', which benefits no one, least if all, political conservatism.

The concept that Paul has 'won' by losing is fantasy. He hasn't brought libertarian values to the GOP, but simply made himself appear a political lightweight and his libertarianism to be more about isolationism (under the anti-war banner) than a responsible approach to the threat from Islamic fanatics.

Ron Paul has his attributes but he is far from being a libertarian missionary, imparting libertarian 'values' to the heathen GOP minions, as the lead article tries to make us believe. He is a marginal candidate, soon to be blown away in the primary voting and quickly forgotten as the real presidential campaign begins.

27 posted on 11/26/2007 2:35:39 PM PST by Jim Scott (Time Heals)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: Extremely Extreme Extremist

And they call the Paulbots “spammers.”


28 posted on 11/26/2007 2:35:54 PM PST by mvpel (Michael Pelletier)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 26 | View Replies]

To: Jim Scott

Judging by the latest FR poll results, it’s the contest between Hunter and Thompson that’s splitting the Republican party.

And does it even occur to you to ask WHY the Republican party is already weakened? Do you think it might have something to do with the party’s adoption of the “Clinton Doctrine” of “humanitarian warfare?”


29 posted on 11/26/2007 2:37:09 PM PST by mvpel (Michael Pelletier)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 27 | View Replies]

To: Sonora
"But, why post this article here?"


Because I am absolutely disgusted by the GOP's betrayal of the cause of limited government and am desperately looking for a Goldwater type of movement to emerge that will push that cause back to the forefront. Because of his views on the nature of the Islamic threat, I am not supporting his candidacy. That does not mean that I am not interested in what becomes of the movement he has inspired. We really need to stop looking at politics in the short sighted fashion of who is going to win the next election and examine what kind of movement a person can inspire over the long haul. Ron Paul definitely has some warts, but it might very well be the case that the movement which he has inspired may be a political factor long after he is no longer on the political scene. If that turns out to be so, then we need to engage in dialog with his supporters over issues of disagreement. the childish name calling that has substituted for such discussion until now is more worthy of DU or KOS than FR. (At least I wish such were the case)
30 posted on 11/26/2007 2:37:15 PM PST by rob777 (Personal Responsibility is the Price of Freedom)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 17 | View Replies]

To: Extremely Extreme Extremist

If there is any ad blockers, let me know. That means you have an infected machine. My pics come out of private web space. You have a direct link to the pics.


31 posted on 11/26/2007 2:38:55 PM PST by WakeUpAndVote (Ho, Ho, Ho! MERRY CHRISTMAS! God bless us one and all, if you (IF YOU LIKE IT OR NOT!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 26 | View Replies]

To: rob777

He’s attracted a lot of nuts. Temporarily.


32 posted on 11/26/2007 2:41:39 PM PST by trisham (Zen is not easy. It takes effort to attain nothingness. And then what do you have? Bupkis.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: mvpel

The press is enjoying the Ron Paul dynamic right now. Just wait until he isn’t positioned to take down conservative Republicans and you’ll see what I’m predicting.

While the press does diss conservatives, it’s never advisable to see them given another club with which to further that cause.


33 posted on 11/26/2007 2:44:08 PM PST by DoughtyOne (California, where the death penalty is reserved for wholesome values. SB 777)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 25 | View Replies]

To: ctdonath2

he has already “won” by garnering lots of support and not being easily dismissed.
***************

Your statement doesn’t convince me. The same thing could be said about Algore-global warming, gay marriage, open borders, gun control, Jesse Jackson/Al Sharpton-racism, etc.

That is, unless one considers winning differently than I do. No protest campaign is foolish enuf to eliminate all positions that others can support.


34 posted on 11/26/2007 2:44:25 PM PST by crazyshrink (Being uninformed is one thing, choosing ignorance is a whole different problem.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 16 | View Replies]

To: rob777
Ooo wah, ooo wah cool, cool kitty Tell us about the boy from New York City Ooo wah, ooo wah c'mon kitty Tell us about the boy from New York City

35 posted on 11/26/2007 2:44:53 PM PST by Revolting cat! (We all need someone we can bleed on...)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Jim Scott

I agree Jim.


36 posted on 11/26/2007 2:45:15 PM PST by DoughtyOne (California, where the death penalty is reserved for wholesome values. SB 777)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 27 | View Replies]

To: Prime Rib Minister
Ron Paul is rousing the moonbat subset of the Republican party.

I'd never thought I'd see the day when supporting federalism and the Constitution in its original intent became "moonbatty."

True constitutionalist as well as true conservatives think his stances are bunk.

How many more statements are you going to pull from your anus?

Republicans fund him

No Republicans, corporations, globalists, or leftist organizations are funding Dr. Paul.

in the hopes he runs as a 3rd party candidate

He has stated millions of times he's not running as a 3rd party candidate. But you knew that already. You want Paul to run as a 3rd party candidate so the GOP will have a scapegoat when they lose.

and in doing so pulls votes from the Democrats- not because his message “resonates.”

Mind telling me why leftists would support someone who's the polar opposite of their beliefs?

He’s given libertarianism a black-eye.

You mean he's given the pro-dopers, pro-open borders, anti-war kook big L libertarians black-eyes, not the small-l libertarians who make up the bulk of his support.

37 posted on 11/26/2007 2:47:56 PM PST by Extremely Extreme Extremist
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 20 | View Replies]

To: trisham
"He’s attracted a lot of nuts. Temporarily."


I think that this is a case of wishful thinking. It is clear form visiting a number of the blogs run by his supporters, or by viewing the numerous YouTube videos which support him, that a large segment of his support comes from people who take the cause of limited government seriously and feel betrayed by the leadership of both parties. In fact, I have found a few sites when the posters supported him IN SPITE OF his stand on the WOT. He certainly gets a lot of support from the hard money investors based on his call for a sound currency.
38 posted on 11/26/2007 2:51:46 PM PST by rob777 (Personal Responsibility is the Price of Freedom)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 32 | View Replies]

To: rob777

Wishful thinking? Not on my part.


39 posted on 11/26/2007 2:52:50 PM PST by trisham (Zen is not easy. It takes effort to attain nothingness. And then what do you have? Bupkis.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 38 | View Replies]

To: Cat loving Texan

I believe you are correct. It is the Democrat liberaltarians coming to support him in greater numbers than even the Neo-Nazis.


40 posted on 11/26/2007 2:54:11 PM PST by ImpBill ("America ... Where are you now?" --Greg Adams--Brownsville, TX --On the other Front Line)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: mvpel
Judging by the latest FR poll results, it’s the contest between Hunter and Thompson that’s splitting the Republican party.

Duncan Hunter is a non-starter. Rasmussen shows him with less than 1% which is hardly a threat to Thompson, who is at 13% (tied with Romney).

And does it even occur to you to ask WHY the Republican party is already weakened? Do you think it might have something to do with the party’s adoption of the “Clinton Doctrine” of “humanitarian warfare?”

I think it has to do with the free-spending Republican congress - that was defeated in 2006 - (we showed them) and the stupid stands on illegal immigration taken by the Bush administration and some Republican congressional Representatives and Senators last summer. The liberalism of Rudy Giuliani, the Republican leader in the GOP presidential nomination 'horse race', is also a dividing factor.

However, I believe that the majority of conservatives will bind together to support and vote for the Republican candidate that is selected via primary to run against the putative Democrat nominee, Marxist Hillary Clinton, who makes Giuliani's 'liberal' positions on 'cultural issues' look a lot less scary compared to her determined socialist plans for this country. I refuse to act like a petulant whiner and give up my right to vote next November because the GOP nominee isn't exactly to my liking. The '08 presidential election is too important for that kind of childishness and frivolous candidates like Ron Paul with his 'get out of Iraq' message and flirtation with 9/11 'government conspiracy' theories simply waste everyone's time.

41 posted on 11/26/2007 2:58:04 PM PST by Jim Scott (Time Heals)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 29 | View Replies]

To: ImpBill
"It is the Democrat liberaltarians coming to support him in greater numbers than even the Neo-Nazis."


Actually, the single most prominent source of organized support he gets seems to come from the rank and file members of the Republican Liberty Caucus, which represents the libertarian wing of the Republican party.
42 posted on 11/26/2007 2:58:12 PM PST by rob777 (Personal Responsibility is the Price of Freedom)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 40 | View Replies]

To: Jim Scott
Ron's vehement anti-war message simply strengthens Democrats

Actually it's having the opposite effect. Paul has exposed the Democrats' anti-war hypocrisy, and in turn most of the independents who voted for the Democrats in the mid-terms are angry and disappointed. They're now backing Paul.

The extreme left - the Code Pinkers, etc. are still behind Hillary & Obama. They support things like using our military for "peaceful" purposes, such as intervening in Darfur. Paul opposes this, and whatever amount of leftists that are supporting Paul are going to be in for a rude awakening when they find out he's not a pacifist.

who flock to 'support' him but who, in reality, are hoping to fracture the already-weakened Republican party.

The Republican Party is fractured because it gave the middle finger to fiscal conservatives & right-leaning populists for six years. It is already weak because people believe in fighting wars and getting them over with rather than trying to spread "democracy" to a bunch of heathens. Democrats had nothing to do with it.

The Libertarian small-government message is practically invisible with Ron Paul ranting about Iraq.

Dr. Paul has outlined his policies on dozens of other issues. The Iraq war is prominent because of the spending on it. Perhaps you should visit his online library, rather than getting the spin from the establishment who highlights his foreign policy views to make him seem like a kook.

His suggestions that there is a possibility of 'the government' being involved in the death and destruction of the terrorist attacks of 9/11/01, simply mark Ron Paul and his libertarianism as part of a 'kook fringe'

He never "suggested" or implied any such thing.

43 posted on 11/26/2007 3:00:07 PM PST by Extremely Extreme Extremist
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 27 | View Replies]

To: Extremely Extreme Extremist

I’d never thought I’d see the day when supporting federalism and the Constitution in its original intent became “moonbatty.”

How many more statements are you going to pull from your anus?

No Republicans, corporations, globalists, or leftist organizations are funding Dr. Paul.

He has stated millions of times he’s not running as a 3rd party candidate. But you knew that already. You want Paul to run as a 3rd party candidate so the GOP will have a scapegoat when they lose.

Mind telling me why leftists would support someone who’s the polar opposite of their beliefs?

You mean he’s given the pro-dopers, pro-open borders, anti-war kook big L libertarians black-eyes, not the small-l libertarians who make up the bulk of his support.
***************

Absolutism is so “Ron Paul”
s/o


44 posted on 11/26/2007 3:02:28 PM PST by crazyshrink (Being uninformed is one thing, choosing ignorance is a whole different problem.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 37 | View Replies]

To: crazyshrink

Al Gore is a “rock star” to the average young Sheeple. Jesse Jackson and Al Sharpton are not only household names everywhere, they’re heroes in the Black community.

I think you just proved his point - if you wind up being better-known, you have, in a way, won.


45 posted on 11/26/2007 3:02:32 PM PST by canuck_conservative
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 34 | View Replies]

To: canuck_conservative

Not in my opinion. Gore etal. may think they have won, once again proving their disdain for out country. The country has clearly lost.


46 posted on 11/26/2007 3:05:57 PM PST by crazyshrink (Being uninformed is one thing, choosing ignorance is a whole different problem.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 45 | View Replies]

To: Extremely Extreme Extremist

Well, you’re going to have to care what the GOP insiders and hacks think when you’re trying to get their support.

Don’t EVER ask me to back up what I say again, took forever to find:

http://www.rasmussenreports.com/public_content/politics/election_2008__1/2008_presidential_election/iowa/republican_iowa_caucus

“Among those likely to take part in the Iowa Republican caucuses, Romney is viewed favorably by 76%, Huckabee by 65%, Giuliani by 74%, and Thompson by 73%. Those numbers reflect a six-point gain for Giuliani while impressions of the other candidates is essentially unchanged from a month ago.

McCain’s numbers, while still weak, have improved over the past month. Among Republicans likely to participate in the caucus, 61% have a favorable opinion of the Arizona Senator while 38% have an unfavorable view. A month ago, just 53% offered a positive assessment of the man once presumed to be the GOP frontrunner.

Ron Paul is viewed favorably by 33% and unfavorably by 55%”


47 posted on 11/26/2007 3:07:44 PM PST by Baladas
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 24 | View Replies]

To: rob777
".... the long term political impact of the movement he has inspired is of intense interest to me."

Ahem! Would that be like the Ross Perot movement? Ross was a lot bigger.

48 posted on 11/26/2007 3:10:46 PM PST by Anti-Bubba182
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Baladas
Ron Paul is viewed favorably by 33% and unfavorably by 55%”

That will change considerably as more people hear more about cut and run. The more any Republican or any real American hear what he has to say the more they will realize how anti-American he is. Iowa is too pro America to ever vote for a white flag waving anti-American who wants to lose the WOT like cut and run.
49 posted on 11/26/2007 3:13:40 PM PST by rideharddiefast
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 47 | View Replies]

To: Anti-Bubba182
"Would that be like the Ross Perot movement? Ross was a lot bigger."


Perot did not have a clear ideology. The author points out how Christian conservatives went on to assume a prominent role within the GOP after cutting their political teeth on the Pat Robertson campaign. Robertson himself did not become a political factor, but the movement that came about in support of him did. This is a reasonable model for Ron Paul supporters, who support limited government, to follow. The first sign on such a thing taking shape would be if the Republican Liberty Caucus experiences an influx of new blood following the elections.
50 posted on 11/26/2007 3:18:00 PM PST by rob777 (Personal Responsibility is the Price of Freedom)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 48 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-5051-100101-113 next last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson